Advances and surgical decision-making for breast reconstruction

Factors influencing the decision-making process in breast reconstruction from the perspective of reconstructive surgeons: A qualitative study involving Korean plastic surgeons

BACKGROUND

Little research has been conducted on factors influencing the decision-making process for immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) options from the perspective of reconstructive surgeons, despite its significant impact on doctor-patient communication and shared decision-making. This study aims to explore the multiple factors and the mechanisms by which they interact using a qualitative methodology. We also address potential barriers to shared decision-making in IBR.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of reconstructive surgeons. Thematic analysis was used to identify key influences on IBR decision-making process from the perspective of reconstructive surgeons.

RESULTS

Four major themes were identified: 1. Patient clinical scenarios; 2. Nonclinical practice environments; 3. Reconstructive surgeon preferences; and 4. Patient consultation. Reconstructive surgeons demonstrated diverse approaches to patient clinical scenarios. High-volume centers were significantly influenced by nonclinical factors such as scheduling and operating room allocation systems. Reconstructive surgeons often had strong personal preferences for specific IBR options, shaped by their expertise, experience, and clinical environment. Based on the preliminary decision, surgeons provided information with varying degrees of neutrality. Patients varied in their knowledge and participation, resulting in variation in the final decision authority among surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the need to address nonclinical environmental constraints to improve shared decision-making process in IBR. Surgeons should recognize power imbalances in the doctor-patient relationship and be aware of their biases.

Patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes following mastectomy for breast cancer, with immediate, delayed or no breast reconstruction: Four-year follow-up from a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction (BR) improves women's health-related quality of life (HRQOL) following mastectomy for breast cancer, yet factors contributing to improved HRQOL remain unclear. This study aimed to explore the overall impact of mastectomy with or without BR on participants' perceptions of HRQOL over time in a cohort of women with high-risk breast cancer; to examine differences in mean HRQOL scores between immediate BR, delayed BR and no BR groups; to assess the influence of patient characteristics potentially associated with HRQOL scores; and to determine the feasibility of long-term collection of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical settings.

METHODS

A prospective, longitudinal study of 100 women with high-risk breast cancer who underwent mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction and were likely to require post-mastectomy radiotherapy. Four validated patient-reported questionnaires, comprising 21 outcome measures relating to HRQOL, administered at baseline and up to 4 years post-mastectomy. Demographic, clinical and surgical data extracted from patient medical records.

RESULTS

Consistently significant declines in perceptions of future health and arm symptoms, consistently significant improvements in treatment side effects, breast symptoms and fatigue, as well as significant improvements, compared to baseline, in social functioning and financial difficulties at 48 months. No significant differences in mean HRQOL scores between women given a choice of reconstructive options.

CONCLUSION

Similar trajectories of HRQOL scores were found in women with high-risk breast cancer who were offered a choice of BR. Informed choice may be an independent contributing factor in long-term maintenance of most HRQOL indicators at their pre-mastectomy levels.

Does concurrent gynaecological surgery affect infectious complications rate after mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction?

BACKGROUND

Women who undergo breast cancer surgery often have an indication for gynaecological procedure. The aim of our study was to compare infectious complications rate after mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction in patients with and without concurrent gynaecological procedure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of 159 consecutively operated patients after mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction. The patients were divided in 2 groups: 102 patients without (Group1) and 57 with (Group 2) concurrent gynaecological procedure. Infectious complications rates between the groups were compared using χ²-test. Logistic regression was performed to test for association of different variables with infectious complications.

RESULTS

There were 240 breast reconstructions performed. Median follow-up time was 297 days (10-1061 days). Mean patient age was 47.2 years (95% CI 32.8-65.9); 48.2 years (95% CI 46.1-50.3) in Group 1 and 45.8 years (95% CI 43.2-48.3) in Group 2; p = 0.002). Infectious complications rate was 17.6% (17.6% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.987), implant loss occurred in 5.7% (4.9% vs. 7.0%, p = 0.58). Obesity (body mass index [BMI] > 30 kg/m²), age, previous breast conserving treatment (BCT) with radiotherapy (RT) were identified as risk factors for infectious complications in univariate analysis. Obesity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.319, 95% CI 1.085-10.157, p = 0.036) and BCT with RT (aOR 7.481, 95% CI 2.230-25.101, p = 0.001) were independently associated with infectious complications in multivariate model.

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent gynaecological procedure for patients undergoing mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction did not carry an increased risk for infectious complications.

Radiotherapy and Breast Reconstruction: What Is the Ideal Timing? A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Women undergoing mastectomy choose to pursue breast reconstruction (BR) in order to reduce their body image distress.Adjuvant chest wall irradiation is associated with a negative cosmetic outcome. The aim of our review was to identify the optimal timing of BR relating to radiotherapy delivery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Springer, Wanfang and CNKI, we performed a non-systematic review of articles published up to August 2021.

RESULTS

There is no hard evidence in favor of immediate, delayed or 2-stage BR when post-mastectomy radiation is indicated. Immediate and 2-stage BR seem to be valid alternatives to delayed BR.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is essential in order to assess clinician and patient reported aesthetic outcomes and determine the optimal timing of BR in view of post-mastectomy radiotherapy, in breast cancer survivors.

Predictors of delayed breast reconstruction in the Netherlands: a 5-year follow-up study in stage I-III breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

Delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) is a valid option for postmastectomy breast cancer patients who have a desire for breast reconstruction but are not considered suitable for immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical practice and predictors of the use of DBR in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Stage I-III breast cancer patients diagnosed from January to March 2012 and treated with mastectomy were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Routinely collected patient, tumor, treatment and hospital characteristics were complemented with data about DBR up to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with postmastectomy DBR. Factors associated with time to DBR were identified through Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of all patients who underwent mastectomy (n = 1,415), 10.2% underwent DBR. DBR patients more often received autologous reconstruction compared to IBR patients (37.5% vs 6.2%, p < 0.001). Age below 50 years (age < 35 OR 15.55, age 35-49 OR 4.18) and neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.59 and OR 2.83, respectively) were significantly associated with DBR. Mean time to DBR was 2.4 years [range 1-6 years]. Time to DBR was significantly associated with age < 35 years (HR 2.22), and a high hospital volume (HR 1.87).

DISCUSSION

The use of DBR after mastectomy could not be fully explained by age below 50 years, chemotherapy, and hospital volume. Treatment with radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy increased time to DBR. More information about patient preferences is needed to understand the use and timing of reconstruction.

Patient-reported outcomes of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with and without biological or synthetic mesh

BACKGROUND

Biological and synthetic meshes may improve the outcomes of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) by facilitating single-stage procedures and improving cosmesis. Supporting evidence is, however, limited. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of biological and synthetic mesh on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of IBBR 18 months after surgery.

METHODS

Consecutive women undergoing immediate IBBR between February 2014 and June 2016 were recruited to the study. Demographic, operative, oncological and 3-month complication data were collected, and patients received validated BREAST-Q questionnaires at 18 months. The impact of different IBBR techniques on PROs were explored using mixed-effects regression models adjusted for clinically relevant confounders, and including a random effect to account for clustering by centre.

RESULTS

A total of 1470 participants consented to receive the questionnaire and 891 completed it. Of these, 67 women underwent two-stage submuscular reconstructions. Some 764 patients had a submuscular reconstruction with biological mesh (495 women), synthetic mesh (95) or dermal sling (174). Fourteen patients had a prepectoral reconstruction. Compared with two-stage submuscular reconstructions, no significant differences in PROs were seen in biological or synthetic mesh-assisted or dermal sling procedures. However, patients undergoing prepectoral IBBR reported better satisfaction with breasts (adjusted mean difference +6.63, 95 per cent c.i. 1.65 to11.61; P = 0.009). PROs were similar to those in the National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit 2008-2009 cohort, which included two-stage submuscular procedures only.

CONCLUSION

This study found no difference in PROs of subpectoral IBBR with or without biological or synthetic mesh, but provides early data to suggest improved satisfaction with breasts following prepectoral reconstruction. Robust evaluation is required before this approach can be adopted as standard practice.

Is Tissue Expansion Worth It? Comparative Outcomes of Skin-preserving versus Delayed Autologous Breast Reconstruction

Background:

The requirement for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) at the time of mastectomy is often unknown. Autologous reconstruction is preferred in the setting of radiotherapy by providing healthy vascularized tissue to the chest. To maximize mastectomy skin preservation, tissue expander (TE) placement maintains the breast pocket until definitive reconstruction. This study aims to compare outcomes of skin-preserving delayed versus standard delayed autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of PMRT.

Methods:

A retrospective review of a prospective database was performed of two patient cohorts at a single center between 2006 and 2016. Inclusion criteria were locally advanced breast cancer patients who completed PMRT and free autologous reconstruction. Primary outcomes were major intraoperative and postoperative TE and flap complications.

Results:

Over 10 years, 241 patients underwent mastectomy and PMRT. Standard delayed autologous breast reconstruction was performed in 131 breasts (non-TE group). Skin-preserving delayed autologous reconstruction was performed in 113 breasts (TE group). The TE group was associated with a higher incidence of intraoperative complications during flap reconstruction (P = 0.002) and had a higher venous thrombosis incidence than the non-TE cohort (P = 0.007). Other major postoperative complications were not significantly different between the two groups. TE patients had 7.5 times higher risk of intraoperative complications and an 18.6% TE loss rate.

Conclusions:

We identified higher intraoperative flap complications and a high rate of TE loss in patients who underwent skin-preserving delayed autologous breast reconstruction. The benefit of mastectomy skin preservation needs to be weighed against the increased risk of TE loss and higher rates of flap thrombosis.

Delivering Breast Reconstruction Information to Patients-Part 2: Women Report on Preferred Information Content

Purpose

To determine the type of information women want to be provided in order to make an informed decision as to whether, when, and using what technique to proceed with breast reconstruction.

Method

Using purposeful sampling, 19 patients who had recently undergone various breast reconstruction procedures were recruited to each participate in a 30- to 45-minute semi-structured interview. Participants shared their insights and beliefs regarding the type of breast reconstruction information they most valued prior to undergoing breast reconstruction surgery. Participants were also queried as to perceived information gaps. In some cases, the participants' partners or support persons were also interviewed. Grounded theory and thematic analysis assisted in interview transcript analysis.

Results

Eight topics were identified relating to women's informational needs around breast reconstruction. Examples include how to weigh the pros and cons of various breast reconstruction options to decide between flap or implant reconstruction, whether there are safety concerns with immediate breast reconstruction or nipple-sparing reconstruction, and expectations and advice on how to manage possibly unexpected intimacy issues after breast reconstruction.

Conclusions

Using mixed methods research methodology, 19 women reported on preoperative informational gaps relating to their recent breast reconstruction experiences. Patients report that adequate breast reconstruction information prior to breast reconstruction surgery helps them to manage their expectations, prepare for surgery and recovery, and improve postoperative satisfaction.

Factors Leading to Decreased Rates of Immediate Postmastectomy Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to determine if there was a difference in immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) rates between our public hospital and private cancer center, which share a common faculty with a consistent management philosophy in multidisciplinary care. We investigated the factors affecting postmastectomy reconstruction and IBR rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified women with clinical stage I-II breast cancer who underwent mastectomy at our public hospital, Los Angeles County Medical Center, and our private cancer center, Keck Hospital of USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to study predictors of IBR and any breast reconstruction.

RESULTS

Of 293 mastectomy patients, the rate of any breast reconstruction at the private cancer (56.6%) center was higher than that at the public hospital (36.2%). IBR rates for the private cancer center (93.6%) and for patients with private insurance were higher than for the public hospital (40.8%) and likewise for those without insurance (86.7% versus 45.5%). In a multivariate analysis, the odds of IBR at our private cancer center were 22.96 times higher than that at our public hospital. Age >50 y and radiotherapy were independent predictive factors associated with less likelihood of any breast reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients at the public hospital had a much lower rate of breast reconstruction than the private cancer center patients, even after controlling for stage and the team of treating physicians. Our results showed that older age and radiotherapy affect rates of breast reconstruction, as do hospital system and insurance status.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction Does Not Have a Clinically Significant Impact on Adjuvant Treatment Delay and Subsequent Survival Outcomes

Purpose

The use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been debated because it may be a causative factor in adjuvant treatment delay and may subsequently increase the probability of recurrence. We investigated whether IBR was related to adjuvant treatment delay and survival outcomes.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the duration from operation to adjuvant treatment administration and survival outcomes according to IBR status among patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy from January 2005 to December 2014. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the clinicopathologic baseline characteristics between patients who did and did not undergo IBR.

Results

Of 646 patients, 107 (16.6%) underwent IBR, and the median follow-up was 72 months. The median duration from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly longer in patients who underwent IBR than in those who did not (14 vs. 12 days, respectively, p = 0.008). Based on propensity score matching, patients who underwent IBR received adjuvant therapy 3 days later than those who did not (14 vs. 11 days, respectively, p = 0.044). The duration from surgery to post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Local recurrence-free survival, regional recurrence-free survival, systemic recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were also not significantly different between the 2 groups (p = 0.427, p = 0.445, p = 0.269, and p = 0.250, respectively). In the case-matched cohort, survival outcomes did not change.

Conclusion

IBR was associated with a modest increase in the duration from surgery to chemotherapy that was statistically but not clinically significant. Moreover, IBR had no influence on PMRT delay or survival outcomes, suggesting that it is an acceptable option for patients with non-metastatic breast cancer undergoing mastectomy.

Delivering Breast Reconstruction Information to Patients: Women Report on Preferred Information Delivery Styles and Options

Purpose

To discover missed opportunities for providing information to women undergoing breast reconstruction in an effort to decrease regret and improve patient education, teaching modalities, and satisfaction.

Method

Thirty- to 45-minute semi-structured interviews were conducted exploring patient experiences with information provision on breast reconstruction. Purposeful sampling was used to include women with a variety of reconstruction types at different time points along their recovery. Using grounded theory methodology, 2 independent reviewers analyzed the transcripts and generated thematic codes based on patient responses. BREAST-Q scores were also collected to compare satisfaction scores with qualitative responses.

Results

Patients were interested in a wide variety of topics related to breast reconstruction including the pros and cons of different options, nipple-sparing mastectomies, immediate breast reconstruction, oncological safety/monitoring and the impact of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, secondary procedures (balancing, nipple reconstruction), post-operative recovery, and long-term expectations. Patients valued accessing information from multiple sources, seeing numerous photographs, being guided to reliable information online, and having access to a frequently asked questions file or document. Information delivery via interaction with medical personnel and previously reconstructed patients was most appreciated. Compared with BREAST-Q scores for satisfaction with the plastic surgeon (mean: 95.7, range: 60-100), informational satisfaction scores were lower at 74.7 (50-100), confirming the informational gaps expressed by interviewees.

Conclusions

Women having recently undergone breast reconstruction reported key deficiencies in information provided prior to surgery and identified preferred information delivery options. Addressing women's educational needs is important to achieve appropriate expectations and improve satisfaction.

Tissue expansion for breast reconstruction: Methods and techniques

OBJECTIVE

In this work, the authors review recent data on the different methods and techniques of TE/implant-based reconstruction to determine the complication profiles and the advantages and disadvantages of the different techniques. This information will be valuable for surgeons performing breast reconstructions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A thorough literature review was conducted by the authors concerning the current strategy of tissue expander (TE)/implant-based breast reconstruction following breast cancer surgery.

RESULTS

Loss of the breast can strongly affect a woman's personal and social life while breast reconstruction reduces the sense of mutilation felt by women after a mastectomy, and provides psychosocial as well as aesthetic benefits. TE/implant-based reconstruction is the most common breast reconstructive strategy, constituting almost 65% of all breast reconstructions in the US. Although numerous studies have been published on various aspects of alloplastic breast reconstructions, most studies are single-center observations. No evidence-based guidelines are available as yet. Conventional TE/implant-based reconstruction can be performed as a two-stage procedure either in the immediate or delayed setting. Moreover, the adjunctive use of acellular dermal matrix further broadened the alloplastic breast reconstruction indication and also enhanced aesthetic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TE/implant-based reconstruction has proved to be a safe, cost-effective, and reliable technique that can be performed in women with various comorbidities. Short operative time, fast recovery, and absence of donor site morbidity are other advantages over autologous breast reconstruction.

Variation in the provision and practice of implant-based breast reconstruction in the UK: Results from the iBRA national practice questionnaire

Introduction

The introduction of biological and synthetic meshes has revolutionised the practice of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) but evidence for effectiveness is lacking. The iBRA (implant Breast Reconstruction evAluation) study is a national trainee-led project that aims to explore the practice and outcomes of IBBR to inform the design of a future trial. We report the results of the iBRA National Practice Questionnaire (NPQ) which aimed to comprehensively describe the provision and practice of IBBR across the UK.

Methods

A questionnaire investigating local practice and service provision of IBBR developed by the iBRA Steering Group was completed by trainee and consultant leads at breast and plastic surgical units across the UK. Summary data for each survey item were calculated and variation between centres and overall provision of care examined.

Results

81 units within 79 NHS-hospitals completed the questionnaire. Units offered a range of reconstructive techniques, with IBBR accounting for 70% (IQR:50–80%) of participating units' immediate procedures. Units on average were staffed by 2.5 breast surgeons (IQR:2.0–3.0) and 2.0 plastic surgeons (IQR:1.0–3.0) performing 35 IBBR cases per year (IQR:20-50). Variation was demonstrated in the provision of novel different techniques for IBBR especially the use of biological (n = 62) and synthetic (n = 25) meshes and in patient selection for these procedures.

Conclusions

The iBRA-NPQ has demonstrated marked variation in the provision and practice of IBBR in the UK. The prospective audit phase of the iBRA study will determine the safety and effectiveness of different approaches to IBBR and allow evidence-based best practice to be explored.

•

Implant breast reconstruction (IBBR) and the range of techniques is poorly evidence based.

•

We aimed to explore the current practice of IBBR in the UK to inform the design of a future definitive study.

•

Significant variation was demonstrated in the availability of techniques and patient selection for IBBR.

•

There is a need for well-designed studies to establish best practice and improve outcomes for patients considering IBBR.

Association between age and access to immediate breast reconstruction in women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

National guidelines state that patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in England should be offered immediate breast reconstruction (IR), unless precluded by their fitness for surgery or the need for adjuvant therapies.

METHODS

A national study investigated factors that influenced clinicians' decision to offer IR, and collected data on case mix, operative procedures and reconstructive decision-making among women with breast cancer having a mastectomy with or without IR in the English National Health Service between 1 January 2008 and 31 March 2009. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between whether or not women were offered IR and their characteristics (tumour burden, functional status, planned radiotherapy, planned chemotherapy, perioperative fitness, obesity, smoking status and age).

RESULTS

Of 13 225 women, 6458 (48·8 per cent) were offered IR. Among factors the guidelines highlighted as relevant to decision-making, the three most strongly associated with the likelihood of an offer were tumour burden, planned radiotherapy and performance status. Depending on the combination of their values, the probability of an IR offer ranged from 7·4 to 85·1 per cent. A regression model that included all available factors discriminated well between whether or not women were offered IR (c-statistic 0·773), but revealed that increasing age was associated with a fall in the probability of an IR offer beyond that expected from older patients' tumour and co-morbidity characteristics.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians are broadly following guidance on the offer of IR, except with respect to patients' age.

The Nipple-Areola Preserving Mastectomy: The Value of Adding a Delay Procedure

Background:

Conservative mastectomy procedures, such as the nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), present appealing options for patients with small invasive or noninvasive malignancies and those needing prophylactic mastectomies. Despite outstanding postoperative cosmetic results, nipple–areola complex (NAC) and mastectomy skin flap (MSF) survival remains a concern. We present our two-stage nipple–areola preserving (NAP) mastectomy, which aims to decrease the rate of NAC loss and MSF necrosis after conservative mastectomies.

Material and Methods:

Seventy patients who underwent NSM because of malignant and benign conditions were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent our two-stage NAP mastectomy were matched to the group of mastectomy patients without preservation techniques. Demographic data and postoperative results were retrospectively assessed.

Results:

The NAP group comprised 45 flaps (24 patients), and the NSM group comprised 75 flaps (46 patients). None were actively smoking. The mean time between the delay of the flap and breast reconstruction was 17.6 days (range, of 10–35 days) in the NAP group. No signs of NAC vascular compromise were observed in the NAP group. Nipple necrosis rates were significantly greater (P = 0.0136) in the NSM group: 9 cases in the NSM group versus none within the NAP group. Two patients within the NAP group required nipple excision at the time of their mastectomies after biopsies performed at the time of the NAC delay were positive for malignancy or atypia.

Conclusions:

Vascular delay techniques favor the blood supply of a tissue after a surgical wound, effectively improving the survival of the NAC and MSF after nipple-sparing mastectomies.

The iBRA (implant breast reconstruction evaluation) study: protocol for a prospective multi-centre cohort study to inform the feasibility, design and conduct of a pragmatic randomised clinical trial comparing new techniques of implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure in the UK. The introduction of techniques to augment the subpectoral pocket has revolutionised the procedure, but there is a lack of high-quality outcome data to describe the safety or effectiveness of these techniques. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the best way of comparing treatments, but surgical RCTs are challenging. The iBRA (implant breast reconstruction evaluation) study aims to determine the feasibility, design and conduct of a pragmatic RCT to examine the effectiveness of approaches to IBBR.

METHODS/DESIGN

The iBRA study is a trainee-led research collaborative project with four phases:Phase 1 - a national practice questionnaire (NPQ) to survey current practicePhase 2 - a multi-centre prospective cohort study of patients undergoing IBBR to evaluate the clinical and patient-reported outcomesPhase 3- an IBBR-RCT acceptability survey and qualitative work to explore patients' and surgeons' views of proposed trial designs and candidate outcomes.Phase 4 - phases 1 to 3 will inform the design and conduct of the future RCT All centres offering IBBR will be encouraged to participate by the breast and plastic surgical professional associations (Association of Breast Surgery and British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons). Data collected will inform the feasibility of undertaking an RCT by defining current practice and exploring issues surrounding recruitment, selection of comparator arms, choice of primary outcome, sample size, selection criteria, trial conduct, methods of data collection and feasibility of using the trainee collaborative model to recruit patients and collect data.

DISCUSSION

The preliminary work undertaken within the iBRA study will determine the feasibility, design and conduct of a definitive RCT in IBBR. It will work with the trainee collaborative to build capacity by creating an infrastructure of research-active breast and plastic surgeons which will facilitate future high-quality research that will ultimately improve outcomes for all women seeking reconstructive surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN37664281.

Pioneering technique using Acellular Dermal Matrix in the rescue of a radiation ulcer

BACKGROUND

Radiotherapy as an adjuvant to mastectomy is integral to the treatment of breast cancer, but can result in skin ulceration. Skin ulceration following radiotherapy is traditionally managed by removing the implant and allowing the skin to heal by secondary intention.

CASE REPORT

A 42-year-old woman underwent radiotherapy following a breast reconstruction. She developed a 2 x 3cm radiation ulcer. The ulcer was managed by removing the implant and performing capsulectomy. A Beckers 50 expander was placed and reinforced with acellular dermal matrix inferolaterally. At follow-up the patient had a good cosmetic outcome.

CONCLUSION

Post-radiation skin ulcers present a challenge to treat with no current standardised management. The use of acellular dermal matrix may present a new technique to promote healing in these testing cases.

Prosthetic breast reconstruction: indications and update

BACKGROUND

Despite 82% of patients reporting psychosocial improvement following breast reconstruction, only 33% patients choose to undergo surgery. Implant reconstruction outnumbers autologous reconstruction in many centres.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Inclusion required: (I) Meta-analyses or review articles; (II) adult patients aged 18 years or over undergoing alloplastic breast reconstruction; (III) studies including outcome measures; (IV) case series with more than 10 patients; (V) English language; and (VI) publication after 1(st) January, 2000.

RESULTS

After full text review, analysis and data extraction was conducted for a total of 63 articles. Definitive reconstruction with an implant can be immediate or delayed. Older patients have similar or even lower complication rates to younger patients. Complications include capsular contracture, hematoma and infection. Obesity, smoking, large breasts, diabetes and higher grade tumors are associated with increased risk of wound problems and reconstructive failure. Silicone implant patients have higher capsular contracture rates but have higher physical and psychosocial function. There were no associations made between silicone implants and cancer or systemic disease. There were no differences in outcomes or complications between round and shaped implants. Textured implants have a lower risk of capsular contracture than smooth implants. Smooth implants are more likely to be displaced as well as having higher rates of infection. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) gives the best aesthetic outcome if radiotherapy is not required but has a higher rate of capsular contracture and implant failure. Delayed-immediate reconstruction patients can achieve similar aesthetic results to IBR whilst preserving the breast skin if radiotherapy is required. Delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) patients have fewer complications than IBR patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Implant reconstruction is a safe and popular mode of post-mastectomy reconstruction. Evidence exists for the settings in which complications are more likely, and we can now more reliably predict outcomes of reconstruction on an individual basis and assess patient suitability.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy between Breast Cancer Patients with and without Immediate Flap Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term clinical outcomes of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) between breast cancer patients with and without immediate transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap reconstruction.

METHODS

The study included 492 patients with stage II or III breast cancer who underwent modified radical mastectomy (MRM) and chemotherapy followed by PMRT between 1997 and 2011. Cox regression model and Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated, and the log-rank test was used to evaluate the differences between overall and disease-free survival rates in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Among 492 patients, 213 patients had immediate TRAM flap reconstruction. The mean follow-up was 7.2 years (range, 11-191 months). The 5-year and 10-year disease free survival rates were 81% and 76% for the TRAM flap group and 78% and 73% for the non-flap group. The 5-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 89% and 73% for the TRAM flap group and 83% and 74% for the non-flap group.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists no statistically significant difference in the rates of local recurrence, distant metastasis, disease-free and overall survival when comparing immediate TRAM flap reconstruction with no reconstruction. Our results suggest that immediate TRAM flap reconstruction does not compromise long term clinical outcomes in breast cancer patients requiring PMRT.

Surgeon motivations behind the timing of breast reconstruction in patients requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy

OBJECTIVES

Although postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has been shown to reduce breast cancer burden and improve survival, PMRT may negatively influence outcomes after reconstruction. The goal of this study was to compare current opinions of plastic and reconstructive surgeons (PRS) and surgical oncologists (SO) regarding the optimal timing of breast reconstruction for patients requiring PMRT.

METHODS

Members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBS), and the Society of Surgical Oncology (SSO) were asked to participate in an anonymous web-based survey. Responses were solicited in accordance to the Dillman method, and they were analyzed using standard descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 330 members of the ASPS and 348 members of the ASBS and SSO participated in our survey. PRS and SO differed in patient-payor mix (p < 0.01) and practice setting (p < 0.01), but they did not differ by urban versus rural setting (p = 0.65) or geographic location (p = 0.30). Although PRS favored immediate reconstruction versus SO, overall timing did not significantly differ between the two specialists (p = 0.14). The primary rationale behind delayed breast reconstruction differed significantly between PRS and SO (p < 0.01), with more PRS believing that the reconstructive outcome is significantly and adversely affected by radiation. Both PRS and SO cited "patient-driven desire to have immediate reconstruction" (p = 0.86) as the primary motivation for immediate reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the optimal timing of reconstruction is controversial between PRS and SO, our study suggests that the timing of reconstruction in PMRT patients is ultimately driven by patient preferences and the desire of PRS to optimize aesthetic outcomes.

Systematic review and critical appraisal of the impact of acellular dermal matrix use on the outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) may improve outcomes in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). The aim of this study was critically to appraise and evaluate the current evidence for ADM-assisted IBBR.

METHODS

Comprehensive electronic searches identified complete papers published in English between January 2000 and August 2013, reporting any outcome of ADM-assisted IBBR. All systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) with more than 20 ADM recipients were included. Studies were critically appraised using AMSTAR for systematic reviews, the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and its adaptation for NRSs. Characteristics and results of identified studies were summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 69 papers (8 systematic reviews, 1 RCT, 40 comparative studies and 20 case series) were identified, all of which were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to patient selection and selective outcome reporting. The median ADM group sample size was 51.0 (i.q.r. 33.0-127.0). Most studies were single-centre (54), and they were often single-surgeon (16). ADM was most commonly used for immediate (40) two-stage IBBR (36) using human ADM (47), with few studies evaluating ADM-assisted single-stage procedures (10). All reported clinical outcomes (for example implant loss) and more than half of the papers (33) assessed process outcomes, but few evaluated cosmesis (16) or patient-reported outcomes (10). Heterogeneity between study design and, especially, outcome measurement precluded meaningful data synthesis.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence for the value of ADMs in IBBR is limited. Use in practice should therefore be considered experimental, and evaluation within registries or well designed and conducted studies, ideally RCTs, is recommended to prevent widespread adoption of a potentially inferior intervention.

Predictors that Influence Election of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy among Women with Ductal Carcinoma in Situ who are BRCA-Negative

The authors retrospectively examined the contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rate among 100 women with ductal carcinoma in situ who are BRCA negative. Of 100 women with ductal carcinoma in situ, 31 elected contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). Factors associated with increased likelihood of undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among this cohort were: family history of ovarian cancer, marital status, reconstruction, mastectomy of the affected breast, and tamoxifen use.

Barriers to immediate breast reconstruction in the Canadian universal health care system

PURPOSE

To describe the population-based rates of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) for all women undergoing mastectomy for treatment or prophylaxis of breast cancer in the past decade, and to evaluate geographic, institutional, and patient factors that influence use in the publically funded Canadian health care system.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study used administrative data that included 28,176 women who underwent mastectomy (25,141 mastectomy alone and 3,035 IBR) between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2012, in Ontario, Canada. We evaluated factors associated with IBR by using a multivariable logistic regression model with the generalized estimating equation approach.

RESULTS

The population-based, age-adjusted IBR rate increased from 5.1 procedures to 8.7 in 100,000 adult women (43.7%; P < .001), and the increase was greatest for prophylactic mastectomy or therapeutic mastectomy for in situ breast cancer (78.6%; P < .001). Women who lived in neighborhoods with higher median income had significantly increased odds of IBR compared with mastectomy alone (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% CI, 1.47 to 2.00), and immigrant women had significantly lower odds (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78). A patient had nearly twice the odds of receiving IBR when she was treated at a teaching hospital (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.06) or at a hospital with two or more available plastic surgeons (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.53 to 2.65). Patients who received IBR traveled significantly farther compared with those who received mastectomy alone (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.05 for every 10 km increase).

CONCLUSION

IBR is available to select patients with favorable clinical and demographic characteristics who travel farther to undergo surgery at teaching hospitals with two or more available plastic surgeons.

Muscle-sparing TRAM flap does not protect breast reconstruction from postmastectomy radiation damage compared with the DIEP flap

BACKGROUND

Irradiation to free flaps following immediate breast reconstruction has been shown to compromise outcomes. The authors hypothesized that irradiated muscle-sparing free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps experience less fat necrosis than irradiated deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective study of all consecutive patients undergoing immediate, autologous, abdomen-based free flap breast reconstruction with muscle-sparing free TRAM or DIEP flaps over a 10-year period at their institution. Irradiated flaps (external-beam radiation therapy) after immediate breast reconstruction were compared with nonirradiated flaps. Logistic regression analysis identified potential associations between patient, tumor, and reconstructive characteristics and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

The analysis included 625 flaps: 40 (6.4 percent) irradiated versus 585 (93.6 percent) nonirradiated. Mean follow-up for the irradiated and nonirradiated flaps was 60.0 and 48.5 months, respectively (p = 0.02). Overall complication rates were similar for both the irradiated and nonirradiated flaps. Irradiated flaps (i.e., both DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps) developed fat necrosis at a significantly higher rate (22.5 percent) than the nonirradiated flaps (9.2 percent; p = 0.009). There were no differences in fat necrosis rates between the DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps in both the irradiated and nonirradiated groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both DIEP and muscle-sparing free TRAM flap reconstructions had much higher rates of fat necrosis when irradiated. Contrary to our hypothesis, the authors found that immediate breast reconstruction with a muscle-sparing free TRAM flap does not result in a lower rate of fat necrosis than reconstruction with a DIEP flap.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

The effects of breast size in unilateral postmastectomy breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Postmastectomy breast reconstruction is offered to women with breast cancer regardless of body habitus and breast size. The decision regarding technique for breast reconstruction includes patient preference, risk factors, and physical characteristics. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a relationship between preoperative breast size and choice of reconstruction, choice of contralateral breast symmetry procedure, and incidence of complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 355 patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction at Emory University from 2005 to 2009 was performed. Patients were stratified into 3 groups based on mastectomy specimen weight with small breasts defined as less than 500 g, medium breasts as 500 to 1000 g, and large breasts as more than 1000 g. Patient demographics were queried including age and risk factors. Additional data points included type of reconstruction, contralateral procedure, and complications.

RESULTS

There were 144 patients with small breasts (40.5%), 150 with medium breasts (42.1%), and 62 with large breasts (17.4%). Women with small breasts were equally likely to undergo tissue expander (34%), latissimus dorsi flap (32%), or TRAM/DIEP flap (34%) reconstruction. Women with medium breasts were most likely to undergo TRAM/DIEP reconstruction (47%), whereas women with large breasts were most likely to undergo latissimus dorsi reconstruction (37%; P = 0.134). Small-breasted women were more likely to undergo contralateral augmentation (P < 0.0001), which varied based on the type of reconstruction. Women with medium-sized breasts were more likely to undergo mastopexy (P = 0.033), and large-breasted women were more likely to undergo reduction (P < 0.0001). Women with complications had a greater mean mastectomy weight than women without complications (744 g compared with 620 g, P = 0.0062), and there was an increasing incidence of postoperative wound infections with increasing breast size (18% of large breasts, 7% of medium breasts, and 3% of small breasts; P = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative breast size does play a role when choosing the most appropriate reconstructive option and symmetry procedure. Being able to adjust the contralateral breast, however, brings the extremes of breast size toward the middle, making most options available regardless of initial size and shape. There are noticeable trends in technique and outcome when stratified by breast size.

Pre-mastectomy sentinel lymph node biopsy: a strategy to enhance outcomes in immediate breast reconstruction

The pre-mastectomy sentinel lymph node biopsy (PM-SLNB) is a technique that provides knowledge regarding nodal status prior to mastectomy. Because radiation exposure is associated with poor outcomes in breast reconstruction and reconstructed breasts can interfere with the planning and delivery of radiation therapy (RT), information regarding nodal status has important implications for patients who desire immediate breast reconstruction. This study explores the safety and utility of PM-SLNB as part of the treatment strategy for breast cancer patients desiring immediate reconstruction. We reviewed the charts of adult patients (≥18 years old) who underwent PM-SLNB from January 2004 to January 2011 at our institution. PM-SLNB was offered to patients with stage I or IIa, clinically and/or radiographically node-negative breast cancer who desired immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy. PM-SLNB was also offered to patients with ductal carcinoma in situ if features concerning for invasive carcinoma were present. Ninety-one patients underwent PM-SLNB of 94 axillae. PM-SLNB was positive in 25.5% of breasts (n = 24). Nineteen node-positive patients (79.2%) have undergone or planning to undergo delayed reconstruction at our institution. Seventeen of these 19 node-positive patients (89.5%) have received adjuvant RT. Two patients (10.5%) elected against RT despite our recommendation for it. No biopsy-positive patient underwent immediate reconstruction or suffered a radiation-induced complication with their breast reconstruction. There were two minor complications associated with PM-SLNB, both in node-negative patients. This study demonstrates the utility of PM-SLNB in providing information regarding nodal status, and therefore the need for adjuvant RT, prior to mastectomy. This knowledge can be used to appropriately counsel patients regarding optimal timing of breast reconstruction.

Effects of radiation therapy for breast cancer based on type of free flap reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant radiation therapy for locally advanced breast cancer decreases local recurrence and improves survival. Immediate autologous breast reconstruction before postmastectomy irradiation is highly controversial. However, it is presently unknown whether there exist differences in the durability of various autologous flaps (myocutaneous or fasciocutaneous) to the effects of radiation.

METHODS

All patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction at the authors' institution between July of 2002 and July of 2005 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients who did not complete all stages of their reconstruction at the authors' institution were excluded. Free flap types were analyzed based on postoperative radiation exposure versus no radiation exposure. The authors also analyzed patients who underwent reconstruction in a delayed fashion with prior radiation exposure and assessed overall outcomes for early and late complications and secondary breast procedures.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-three of 446 flaps (81 percent) were included in the analysis, with the three most common flaps being the free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap (7.4 percent), the muscle-sparing free TRAM flap (44 percent), and the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (41 percent). There were no significant differences in early or late complications among the different flap types or radiation categories. Flaps with prior radiation exposure were associated with higher percentages of contralateral symmetry procedures, whereas flaps with postoperative radiation exposure had a lower incidence of ipsilateral revisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous breast reconstruction can be performed safely regardless of preoperative or postoperative radiation therapy. There are no significant differences in complication rates or number of revisions based on the type of free flap.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction: a retrospective analysis of the surgical and patient-reported outcomes

Background

Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and latissimus dorsi (LD) flap immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is a tailored surgical procedure. The surgical and patient-reported outcome (PRO) of SSM and LD IBR were assessed.

Methods

Retrospective data of 146 SSMs performed by a single surgeon was reviewed. Among patients included in the data, 65 patients underwent SSM and LD IBR without a prosthetic implant. A survey estimating the degree of patient satisfaction (poor, fair, good, and excellent) as regards the cosmetic outcomes of surgery was performed. The patients were divided into two groups according to their degree of satisfaction (excellent group versus non- excellent group), and analysis was done to identify factors affecting the highest patient satisfaction.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 48.4 years, and pathological results were: infiltrating ductal carcinoma (n = 48, 73.8%), ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 15, 23.1%), and others (n = 2, 3.1%). One patient received postmastectomy radiotherapy. After a mean follow-up of 34 months, no local recurrence occurred. There was no skin necrosis or LD flap loss. Donor site morbidities were seroma (n = 8, 12.3%), scarring (n = 8, 12.3%), and back pain (n = 6, 9.2%). Fifty patients (76.9%) were satisfied and 40% reported their degree of satisfaction as excellent. Breast symmetry (P <0.001), nipple cosmesis (P <0.001), visual difference of bilateral breasts (P = 0.021), and panel assessment score (P <0.001) were factors that affected the highest patient satisfaction.

Conclusions

Our SSM and LD IBR was safe, with no local recurrence and low morbidities, and produced a sufficiently high level of patient satisfaction. Achieving breast symmetry and nipple cosmesis would be the key to meeting the patient’s expectation.

Update on breast reconstruction techniques and indications

Breast reconstruction is considered as part of the breast cancer treatment when a mastectomy is required. Implants or expanders are the most frequent techniques used for the reconstructions. Expander provides usually a better symmetry. A contralateral mastoplasty often is required to improve the symmetry. The nipple areola complex, which can be preserved in certain conditions, is usually removed and can be reconstructed in a second stage under local anesthesia. In case of radical mastectomy and/or radiotherapy, a musculocutaneous flap, such as rectus abdominis or latissimus dorsi autologous flaps, is required. When microsurgical facilities are available, free or perforator flaps respecting the muscle are preferred to decrease the donor site complications. In situ carcinomas or prophylactic mastectomy can be reconstructed immediately as well as invasive carcinoma according to the recent literature. Locally advanced breast cancer can be reconstructed after complete oncologic treatment. Radiotherapy of the thoracic wall is proposed in case of lymph node metastases, raising the discussion about the technique choice and the timing of the reconstruction. Plastic surgery procedures can improve the cosmetic results of the conservative surgery, also extending its indications and reducing both mastectomy and reexcision rates. Oncoplasty techniques are becoming more and more sophisticated, requiring the skill of trained plastic surgeons. Numerous publications confirm the psychosocial benefit resulting from the breast reconstruction.

Acellular dermal matrix in breast reconstruction in the setting of radiotherapy

Acellular dermal matrices (ADM) are becoming an integral component of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction, providing inferolateral coverage and support of the implant. Currently, five ADM products are available on the market for this purpose. Although their application has resulted in improved aesthetic results with low complication rates, the clinical performance of ADM when radiotherapy is a component of breast cancer treatment has yet to be defined. In this article, we present a thorough review of the current literature on the performance of ADM in the setting of radiotherapy from both animal and human studies, including our own experience with two proprietary ADM products. The other three products have little literature documenting their application for this type of reconstruction, and further studies specifically evaluating the performance of all ADM formulations in the setting of radiotherapy are still needed.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

With advances in oncologic treatment, cosmesis after mastectomy has assumed a pivotal role in patient and provider decision making. Multiple studies have confirmed the safety of both chemotherapy before breast surgery and immediate reconstruction. Little has been written about the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on decisions about reconstruction.

METHODS

The authors identified 665 patients with stage I through III breast cancer who received chemotherapy and underwent mastectomy at Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women's Cancer Center from 1997 to 2007. By using multivariate logistic regression, reconstruction rates were compared between patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 180) and patients who underwent mastectomy before chemotherapy (n = 485). The rate of postoperative complications after mastectomy was determined for patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with those who did not.

RESULTS

Reconstruction was performed immediately in 44% of patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy but in only 23% of those who did. Twenty-one percent of neoadjuvant chemotherapy recipients and 14% of adjuvant-only chemotherapy recipients underwent delayed reconstruction. After controlling for age, receipt of radiotherapy, and disease stage, neoadjuvant recipients were less likely to undergo immediate reconstruction (odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37, 0.87) but were no more likely to undergo delayed reconstruction (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.75, 2.20). Surgical complications occurred in 30% of neoadjuvant chemotherapy recipients and in 31% of adjuvant chemotherapy recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results suggest that patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy are less likely to undergo immediate reconstruction and are no more likely to undergo delayed reconstruction than patients who undergo surgery before they receive chemotherapy.

Present-day locoregional control in patients with t1 or t2 breast cancer with 0 and 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes after mastectomy without radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine present-day locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates to better understand the role of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in women with 0 to 3 positive lymph nodes.

METHODS

Clinical and pathologic factors were identified for 1019 patients with pT1 or pT2 tumors and 0 (n = 753), 1 (n = 176), 2 (n = 69), or 3 (n = 21) positive lymph nodes treated with mastectomy without PMRT during 1997 to 2002. Total LRR rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and compared between subgroups by the log rank test.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 7.47 years, the overall 10-year LRR rate was 2.7%. The only independent predictor of LRR was younger age (P = 0.004). Patients ≤40 years old had a 10-year LRR rate of 11.3 vs. 1.5% for older patients (P < 0.0001). The 10-year rate of LRR in patients with 1 to 3 positive nodes was 4.3% (94.4% had systemic therapy), which was not significantly different from the 10-year risk of contralateral breast cancer development (6.5%; P > 0.5). Compared with the 10-year LRR rate among patients with node-negative disease (2.1%), patients with 1 positive node had a similar 10-year LRR risk (3.3%; P > 0.5), and patients with 2 positive nodes had a 10-year LRR risk of 7.9% (P = 0.0003). Patients with T2 tumors with 1 to 3 positive nodes had a 10-year LRR rate of 9.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T1 and T2 breast cancer with 0 to 3 positive nodes, LRR rates after mastectomy are low, with the exception of patients ≤40 years old. The indications for PMRT in patients treated in the current era should be reexamined.

Reconstructive surgery in young women with breast cancer

Recovery of body image after mastectomy is essential for physical and mental quality of life. Partial or total mastectomy deformities can be reversed by reconstructive surgical procedures. Young women with breast cancer have specific characteristics related to the age of onset of the disease, prognosis and reconstructive expectations. Patient individualization is the key to a successful breast reconstruction. Autologous and prosthetic reconstruction are the two main techniques used for breast reconstruction. Each reconstructive technique has its own indications, advantages and limitations. Timing of the surgery is primarily determined by the requirement for adjuvant radiotherapy, so an immediate or a delayed approach can be recommended. In patients in whom the need for adjuvant radiotherapy is in doubt, a delayed-immediate approach is the best to optimize aesthetic and oncologic outcomes. Prophylactic mastectomy is also being indicated in a growing number of patients. In these patients it is important to choose a similar reconstructive procedure on both sides to achieve breast symmetry.